From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09572C83000 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 19:10:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD988205C9 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 19:10:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726911AbgD2TKw (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 15:10:52 -0400 Received: from mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.246]:42627 "EHLO mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726456AbgD2TKw (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 15:10:52 -0400 Received: from dimstar.local.net (n175-34-64-112.sun1.vic.optusnet.com.au [175.34.64.112]) by mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with SMTP id 80BBE82046D for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 05:10:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: (qmail 7379 invoked by uid 501); 29 Apr 2020 19:10:47 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 05:10:47 +1000 From: Duncan Roe To: Netfilter Development , Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH libnetfilter_queue 0/3] pktbuff API updates Message-ID: <20200429191047.GB3833@dimstar.local.net> Mail-Followup-To: Netfilter Development , Pablo Neira Ayuso References: <20200426132356.8346-1-pablo@netfilter.org> <20200427110614.GA15436@dimstar.local.net> <20200427170656.GA22296@salvia> <20200428043302.GB15436@dimstar.local.net> <20200428103407.GA1160@salvia> <20200428211452.GF15436@dimstar.local.net> <20200428225520.GA30421@salvia> <20200429132840.GA3833@dimstar.local.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200429132840.GA3833@dimstar.local.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=QIgWuTDL c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=keeXcwCgVCrAuxOn72dlvA==:117 a=keeXcwCgVCrAuxOn72dlvA==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=cl8xLZFz6L8A:10 a=RSmzAf-M6YYA:10 a=3eNlvKiy-tneWrzz9AoA:9 a=z-tfRU1F-fWtw2ha:21 a=D48vfZQzHlIqka8t:21 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:28:40PM +1000, Duncan Roe wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:55:20AM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 07:14:52AM +1000, Duncan Roe wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:34:07PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > [...] > > > > pktb_alloc2() still has a memcpy which is not needed by people that do > > > > not need to mangle the packet. > > > > > > No it does not. Please look again. There is only a memcpy if the caller > > > specifies extra > 0, in which case she clearly intends to mangle it (perhaps > > > depending on its contents). > > > > Right, it only happens if extra is specified. > > > > + if (extra) { > > + pkt_data = buf; > > + memcpy(pkt_data, data, len); > > + memset((uint8_t *)pkt_data + len, 0, extra); > > + } else { > > + pkt_data = data; > > + } > > > > So buf is only used if extra is specified? > > Yes, that's right. > > > > > "depending on its contents" is where the memcpy deferral comes in. pktb_alloc2() > > > verifies that the supplied buffer is big enough (size >= len + extra). The user > > > declared it as a stack variable that size so it will be. With the deferral > > > enhancement, pktb_alloc2() records the buffer address and extra in the enlarged > > > struct pktbuff (extra is needed to tell pktb_mangle how much memory to memset to > > > 0). > > > > I agree that deferring the memcpy() and avoiding the malloc() is the > > way to go, we only have to agree in the way to achieve this. > > > > > If pktb_mangle() finds it has to make the packet larger then its original length > > > and the packet is still in its original location then copy it and zero extra. > > > (i.e. pktb_mangle() doesn't just check whether it was asked to make the packet > > > bigger: it might have previously been asked to make it smaller). > > > > > > Also (and this *is* tricky, update relevant pointers in the struct pktbuff). > > > That invalidates any poiners the caller may have obtained from e.g. pktb_data() > > > - see end of email. > > > > Regarding pktb_mangle() reallocation case, refetching the pointers > > sounds fine, documenting this is sufficient. > > > > [...] > > > > Revisiting, I would prefer to keep things simple. The caller should > > > > make sure that pktb_mangle() has a buffer containing enough room. I > > > > think it's more simple for the caller to allocate a buffer that is > > > > large enough for any mangling. > > I reckon they'll just copy the code from the nfq_nlmsg_verdict_put_pkt() man / > web page. After declaring "char pktbuf[plen + EXTRA];" one can use "sizeof > pktbuf" as the length argument. > > > > > > Yes it's more complex. No problem with the buffer - the user gave that to > > > pktb_alloc2(). > > > > I'm just hesitating about the new pktb_alloc2() approach because it > > has many parameters, it's just looks a bit complicated to me (this > > function takes 8 parameters). > > It has the original 4 from pktb_alloc() plus 2 {buffer, size} pairs. It could > have been just one pair, with packet data appended to metadata as in > pktb_alloc() but I thought it would be really awkward to document how to > dimension it. > > > > If you can just pre-allocate the pkt_buff head from the configuration > > phase (before receiving packets from the kernel), then attach the > > buffer via pktb_setup_metadata() for each packet that is received (so > > the pkt_buff head is recycled). With this approach, pktb_head_size() > > won't be needed either. > > I think we should not be usurping the data pointer of mnl_cb_run(). I can see > people wanting to use it to pass a pointer to e.g. some kind of database that > callbacks need to access. There's no performance gain to recycling the buffer: > the CB doesn't need to call pktb_head_size() on every invocation, that can be > done once by main() e.g. > > static size_t sizeof_head; > ... > int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > { > ... > sizeof_head = pktb_head_size(); /* Avoid multiple calls in CB */ > ... > static int queue_cb(const struct nlmsghdr *nlh, void *data) > { > char head[sizeof_head]; > > > > > My understanding is that requirements are: > > > > * Users that do not want to mangle the packet, they use the buffer > > that was passed to recvmsg(). > > * Users that want to mangle the packet, they use the _mangle() > > function that might reallocate the data buffer (the one you would > > like to have). However, if this data buffer reallocation happens, > > then pkt_buff should annotate that this pkt_buff object needs to > > release this data buffer from pktb_free() otherwise. > > No, there is nothing to release. We told pktb_alloc2() where the buffer was, > it's on the stack (usually). > > > > > Problem is that if mangler moves the packet, then any packet pointer the caller > > > had is invalid (points to the un-mangled copy). This applies at all levels, e.g. > > > nfq_udp_get_payload(). There is no way for the mangler functions to address > > > this: it just has to be highlighted in the documentation. > > > > That's fine, this is exactly how the kernel works: if the function > > might reallocate the data area, then you have to refetch pointers > > after this. If you teach _mangle() to do reallocations, then > > documenting this is fine. > > > > However, those reallocation need pktb_free() to release that new data > > buffer, right? > > No way. There is no malloc() nor free() anywhere. The data buffer is > (recommended to be) on the stack; for running under gdb it may be preferred to > us a static buffer which has to be dimensioned hugely. > > > > > Still, I really like the deferred copy enhancement. Your thoughts? > > > > The deferred copy idea when mangling sounds fine, we only have to > > agree on how to get this done. > > > > Thanks. > > Cheers ... Duncan. Sorry, I should have explained a bit more how the system would work: struct pkt_buff has 3 new members: bool copy_done; uint32_t extra; uint8_t *copy_buf; When extra > 0, pktb_alloc2 verifies that buflen is >= len + extra. It then stores extra and copy_buf in pktb, ready for use by pktb_mangle() (all the other manglers call this eventually). So that's how pktb_mangle() doesn't need to allocate a buffer. Cheers ... Duncan.